Search for: "Perez v. United States"
Results 641 - 660
of 713
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
31 Jul 2012, 2:30 pm
For example, in Pacific Merchant Shipping Association v. [read post]
20 Mar 2009, 7:00 am
You can separately subscribe to the IP Think Tank Global Week in Review at the Subscribe page: [duncanbucknell.com] Highlights this week included: WIPO review of UDRP disputes - record number of complaints handled by WIPO in 2008 (WIPO) (Out-Law) (Michael Geist) (Managing Intellectual Property) (Class 46) (Intellectual Property Watch) (Law360) Goverment outlines new creative industries’ Digital Rights Agency proposed in Digital Britain report (Out-Law) (IP finance) (Intellectual… [read post]
26 Jan 2023, 7:45 pm
” From the States and Municipalities Arizona – Voter Fraud Unit in Arizona Will [read post]
28 Apr 2017, 3:19 pm
” The Plaintiffs in Oregon Restaurant filed a petition for review to the United State Supreme Court. [read post]
30 Mar 2018, 6:19 am
” The Plaintiffs in Oregon Restaurant filed a petition for review to the United State Supreme Court. [read post]
28 Apr 2017, 3:19 pm
” The Plaintiffs in Oregon Restaurant filed a petition for review to the United State Supreme Court. [read post]
9 Feb 2017, 11:56 am
Consider, for example, United States v. [read post]
15 Oct 2010, 5:29 am
Meanwhile the annual IP Publishers and Editors lunch on 7 December, also in London (click here and scroll down for details) has gone one better, with 44 participants signed up from as far afield as the United States and Germany. [read post]
30 Jan 2008, 7:35 am
Bureau of Prisons, No. 06-9130 I"n a case involving the scope of 28 U.S.C. section 2680, which carves out certain exceptions to the United States' waiver of sovereign immunity for torts committed by federal employees, the Court rules that section 2680's broad phrase "any other law enforcement officer" covers all law enforcement officers, and not just law enforcement officers enforcing customs or excise laws. [read post]
9 Apr 2009, 8:39 am
(IP Dragon) (ContentAgenda) Europe Study by Institute of European Media Law: Blanket licence for non-commercial copies needed (Intellectual Property Watch) France French Parliament passes 3-strikes HADOPI law (Ars Technica) (Media Wonk) (TorrentFreak) (IPKat) (Out-Law) (Intellectual Property Watch) (TorrentFreak) (Ars Technica) (ContentAgenda) France to block Pirate Bay (TorrentFreak) AdWords: French first instance court condemns the advertiser: Onixxa v… [read post]
21 Sep 2020, 4:07 am
Maldonado v DiBre, 140 AD3d 1501 [3d Dept 2016], lv denied 28 NY3d 908 [2016] [“even if, as plaintiffs claim, the loss of the units was not voluntary, they still would not have standing to pursue derivative claims”]). [read post]
27 May 2008, 9:50 am
Ctr. for Women v. [read post]
23 Oct 2013, 11:48 am
Copus pointed out that this issue has been raised in a case, UPMC Braddock v Perez, currently pending before the D.C. [read post]
25 May 2012, 1:35 pm
United States, and looking back 160 years to Justice Story's one paragraph opinion for a unanimous court in United States v. [read post]
30 Oct 2007, 1:37 am
Keisler, No. 06-60644"Pakistani native's petition for review of a denial of his application for cancellation of removal from the United States is denied as misuse of a social security number in violation of 42 U.S.C. section 408(a)(7)(A) falls within the definition a crime involving moral turpitude, for purposes of ineligibility for a grant of cancellation of removal. [read post]
17 Jan 2019, 7:58 pm
Any arbitration shall be conducted in Harris County, Texas, United States of America in the English language. [read post]
18 Dec 2018, 9:02 pm
There is an abundant historical record supporting the conclusion that the United States Constitution was promoted by a core group of political leaders in order to strengthen the national government, and that the Constitution was understood by the people during the ratification debate to do just that. [read post]
30 Jul 2014, 12:31 am
In Perez v. [read post]
19 Jul 2016, 6:07 pm
Perez v. [read post]
23 Jan 2007, 4:02 pm
It is very rarely permitted, since the American system of justice is premised upon an open system in which, whenever one side wants to communicate with the Court, it has to give prior notice to the other side, so that they too will have an opportunity to be heard.).The "ex parte" order would give the RIAA permission to take "immediate discovery" -- before the defendants have been served or given notice -- which authorizes the issuance of subpoenas to the ISP's asking for the… [read post]
